Talk:Haane Manahi/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: ErrantX (talk · contribs) 12:22, 27 December 2012 (UTC) I am happy to review this article against the GA criteria. In a quick read through it seems pretty much there, a few comments:[reply]

The lead is very short. For an article of this size I'd expect to see two or at a stretch three paragraphs summarising the article. Consider expanding it.

Done. Zawed (talk) 23:57, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The London Gazette has a record of his DCM (here) which would let you date the award. See {{London Gazette}} for details on how to cite it.

Thanks for this, I have added into article. Zawed (talk) 23:57, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I note you've helpfully linked Mauri words, but it might also be worth having a very short English explanation for some of them (e.g. his tangi (or funeral) was)

Done. Zawed (talk) 23:57, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Another factor in the downgrading may have been Manahi's VC nomination following that of Ngarimu's, just three weeks earlier.; this sentence took me a couple of goes to parse the reasoning from it. Maybe consider rephrasing this to emphasise the reason why this is considered a potential factor in the downgrade, i.e. expand on why that could have lead to a downgrade (if the source provides such analysis).

Yes, rereading that sentence I can see it doesn't flow well. Have added some clarification around this. Zawed (talk) 23:57, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Any dates for the funeral?

I'm afraid not; the main source (Moon) only says it took place a few days after his death. Zawed (talk) 23:57, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Did all of the Takrouna actions happen on the same day? It's a little unclear. I'd suggest that the paragraph beginning Despite reinforcements needs some clarification r.e. time of day or date to make sure the reader is clear on when those events occured.

Have added some clarifying dates/timing so hopefuly clear now. Zawed (talk) 23:57, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see the article is based predominantly on one source, Moon, which looks reliable. However, are there any other sources which could be used to augment the information? In my experience of writing war biographies you will find other books will have tiny pieces of information which slowly build a more complete picture :) I found some sources which may be useful to augment the material, some of which are a lot more recent than the main source:
- How We Saw the War: 1939-45 Through New Zealand Eyes, Ron Palenski (2011)
- The Preliminary Report on the Haane Manahi Victoria Cross Claim (2005)
- Haane Te Rauawa Manahi, 1913-1986 New Zealand. Ministry of Māori Development (2009)
- The Army Quarterly and Defence Journal, Volume 128 (1998)

The official New Zealand War History link is here: http://nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/tm/scholarly/tei-WH2Maor-c11.html

It offers the following information regarding the war crimes: "The Italians made a really determined effort to climb the track but Manahi and Corporal Bell mowed them down with their automatics. The second party forced its way on to the ledge and there was some close-quarter fighting in the alleys between the huts. The Italians lobbed a grenade into a building where the wounded were gathered; it is not suggested that they knew the men were wounded, but the grenade killed most of them. The Maori reaction was ferocious and Italians, whether they wanted to surrender or not, were shot, bayoneted, or thrown over the cliff."

Oops. I have realised that I made a typo in the date used in each citation for Moon; it should be 2010, not 2000. I have fixed all of these. The date of Moon as recited in the references section is correct. The 2005 and 1998 sources are both cited in Moon, however I have found the Preliminary report online and used it as a source to expand a couple of points. I don't have access to the other sources, but suspect that the Ministry of Maori Development source is likely to be in Maori (which I can't read). Zawed (talk) 23:57, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This doesn't affect the GA status, but just a note: if you intend to take this to A Class or Featured Article review then don't mix citations and footnotes.

Not sure I fully understand your comment; I have (I think) used the same style of citation throughout. I know that you aren't supposed to mix styles of citations. Zawed (talk) 23:57, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I just mean that in the Notes section you also have some full citations. Which you'd get asked to change at FAR. --Errant ^(chat!) 17:30, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Other than that, this is an excellent and interesting article! --Errant ^(chat!) 12:22, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback, I'm glad you found it interesting. Also thank you for taking the time to review the article, it is greatly appreciated. Zawed (talk) 23:57, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looks great! Happy to mark this one off as a Good Article! --Errant ^(chat!) 17:30, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]